Archive for November 3, 2022

The censorship of conservatives, and others of us on the political right, has reached pandemic levels.  The main goal of this wholesale censorship is to make sure Democrats maintain power and control over the American people.

This censorship may have begun with the executives running the social media giants acting on their own.  This has morphed into an enthusiastic partnership between the Joe Biden regime and the social media corporations.  The unholy alliance is chronicled in this article from the Interept.

Behind closed doors, and through pressure on private platforms, the U.S. government has used its power to try to shape online discourse. According to meeting minutes and other records appended to a lawsuit filed by Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt, a Republican who is also running for Senate, discussions have ranged from the scale and scope of government intervention in online discourse to the mechanics of streamlining takedown requests for false or intentionally misleading information.

This is an egregious violation of the Freedom of Speech clause of the First Amendment.  At first the social media platforms may have been hesitant, however, they warmed up to this censorship scheme.

“Platforms have got to get comfortable with gov’t. It’s really interesting how hesitant they remain,” Microsoft executive Matt Masterson, a former DHS official, texted Jen Easterly, a DHS director, in February.

In a March meeting, Laura Dehmlow, an FBI official, warned that the threat of subversive information on social media could undermine support for the U.S. government. Dehmlow, according to notes of the discussion attended by senior executives from Twitter and JPMorgan Chase, stressed that “we need a media infrastructure that is held accountable.”

Joe Biden’s corrupt Department of Homeland Security is at the very core of this alliance to censor those who have beliefs and opinions that differ from the progressive orthodoxy.

DHS’s mission to fight disinformation, stemming from concerns around Russian influence in the 2016 presidential election, began taking shape during the 2020 election and over efforts to shape discussions around vaccine policy during the coronavirus pandemic. Documents collected by The Intercept from a variety of sources, including current officials and publicly available reports, reveal the evolution of more active measures by DHS.

According to a draft copy of DHS’s Quadrennial Homeland Security Review, DHS’s capstone report outlining the department’s strategy and priorities in the coming years, the department plans to target “inaccurate information” on a wide range of topics, including “the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic and the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, racial justice, U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, and the nature of U.S. support to Ukraine.”

As with all tyrannies, the justification for this trampling of one of our most fundamental God=given natural rights sounds the tiniest bit noble on the surface. 

DHS justifies these goals — which have expanded far beyond its original purview on foreign threats to encompass disinformation originating domestically — by claiming that terrorist threats can be “exacerbated by misinformation and disinformation spread online.” But the laudable goal of protecting Americans from danger has often been used to conceal political maneuvering.

The scope of this partnership is far reaching.

The extent to which the DHS initiatives affect Americans’ daily social feeds is unclear. During the 2020 election, the government flagged numerous posts as suspicious, many of which were then taken down, documents cited in the Missouri attorney general’s lawsuit disclosed. And a 2021 report by the Election Integrity Partnership at Stanford University found that of nearly 4,800 flagged items, technology platforms took action on 35 percent — either removing, labeling, or soft-blocking speech, meaning the users were only able to view content after bypassing a warning screen. The research was done “in consultation with CISA,” the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency.

Prior to the 2020 election, tech companies including Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, Discord, Wikipedia, Microsoft, LinkedIn, and Verizon Media met on a monthly basis with the FBI, CISA, and other government representatives. According to NBC News, the meetings were part of an initiative, still ongoing, between the private sector and government to discuss how firms would handle misinformation during the election.

There is a very clear and linkage between the Biden regime and these traitorous social media giants.

There is also a formalized process for government officials to directly flag content on Facebook or Instagram and request that it be throttled or suppressed through a special Facebook portal that requires a government or law enforcement email to use. At the time of writing, the “content request system” at is still live. DHS and Meta, the parent company of Facebook, did not respond to a request for comment. The FBI declined to comment.

The author of this Federalist article is right on with this analysis.

Big Tech Isn’t A Victim In The Biden Regime’s Speech Crackdown, It’s An Eager Collaborator.  A self-government cannot survive the two-pronged assault from the government and tech companies working together to suppress disfavored speech and control the public narrative

We conservatives are constantly hit with “fact checks” by the left on things we say either online or in person. As a general rule we respond to said “fact checks” by standing by what we say and pointing out the holes in them an example:

This is why we on the right laugh at fact checkers because we know they’re playing a political game rather than actually checking facts.

However yesterday we saw something we’ve not seen before. The White House tweeted out a factual statement that proclaimed that thanks to Biden’s leadership Seniors are getting their biggest social security raise in 10 years. And we saw a twitter “context” check noting that the increase is do to the cost of living update signed into law by Nixon in 1972 which increases social security based on the inflation rate.

So how did the White House respond to this addition of “context”. They cut and ran:

Yup they deleted the tweet rather than risking people seeing that context.

That’s the difference between the right and the left, we fight back against the left’s “fact checkers” because we know they’re spreading falsehoods, they run away from our fact checkers because they know we’re telling the truth.

If you didn’t understand what they left is terrified of a twitter they can’t control, now you know.